3 ms·
> I still firmly believe containerisation is stop gap It's a primitive that can be composed into other things. It's a better primitive for many cases than VMs
by jacques_chester 10y ago
> I still firmly believe containerisation is stop gap
It's a primitive that can be composed into other things. It's a better primitive for many cases than VMs are.
If you're fretting about containers/not-containers, you're below the value line. What matters is application code that provides value. If you're thinking about how it gets launched and managed, you're losing time to someone who doesn't have to.
Disclosure: I work for Pivotal, we have a fairly close interest in this topic through PivotalCF.
- neom 10y agoYou're still talking about VMs?! :) containers are stop gap, VM is old school, different things.
- jacques_chester 10y agoIn the sense that the uses of both have been about isolating apps from each other. The early fuss about VMs was about increased density -- but only because hardware used to be the boundary of isolation, meaning lots of idle capacity. Containers are a cheaper way to isolate, but the point was and still is isolation. Separate servers -> VMs -> containers. Same song, different instruments.
- neom 10y agoGood history lesson, thanks... you might want to look into why google created kubernetes if those are your opinions, anyway: et l'avenir?
- jacques_chester 10y agoI'm not sure what you're driving at. Orchestration is an example of taking a lower-level primitive and building on it. There are no real novelties in software architecture, just occasional shifts in algo-economics that cause previously burdensome ideas to become cheap and attractive. So predicting the future is premature at this point. It always is, but particularly at the moment. Everyone, including Pivotal, is busy trying to invent it.